| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Incorrect errno used in OpenWalSummaryFile() |
| Date: | 2026-02-02 03:54:26 |
| Message-ID: | aYAf8qDHbpBZ3Rml@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
While looking at walsummary.c for a different thread, I have bumped
into this code:
OpenWalSummaryFile(WalSummaryFile *ws, bool missing_ok)
[...]
file = PathNameOpenFile(path, O_RDONLY);
if (file < 0 && (errno != EEXIST || !missing_ok))
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode_for_file_access(),
errmsg("could not open file \"%s\": %m", path)));
And it seems to me that this EEXIST should be an ENOENT? The top of
the function also documents that we want to handle an error when a
summary file does not exist. The comment makes sense to me, not the
code.
It's also worth noting that this function has two callers, both use
missing_ok = false, meaning that the errno check does not really
matter today. If someone plays with this code on HEAD or the
back-branches and decides to introduce a missing_ok=true call, it
could matter, so I'd rather not change this function signature.
This issue has been mentioned here as well, I've just bumped into it
independently a few hours ago:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/tencent_1CA40FCC21C1C770712BC089@qq.com
Regards,
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| wal-summary-errno.patch | text/plain | 563 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | wenhui qiu | 2026-02-02 03:58:02 | Re: Non-committer reviews: is it helpful? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-02-02 03:34:03 | Re: [PATCH] Fix error message in RemoveWalSummaryIfOlderThan to indicate file removal failure |